The Swan and Cemetery

For the season to date we’re =14th for scoring first (44%) and 9th for points won from scoring first positions. A few stats below, taken from Soccerstats, I haven’t done the hard yards of splitting NP/LM periods, albeit @Mr Popodopolous work above shows LM more successful at gaining points from winning positions. Think overall they show what we’d all think anyway, when we get a lead and opponents chase we’re decent at defending/extending, when we concede first, we’re below average at breaking teams down who are happy to defend their lead. Score first % Top: Southampton 71% 14th: BC 44% bottom: Sunderland/Stoke/Rotherham: 33% PPG from scoring first Top: Leeds 2.82 9th: BC 2.42 Bottom: Rotherham 1.21 Concede first Top: Rotherham 63% =12th: BC 47% Bottom: Southampton 27% PPG from conceding first Top: Ipswich 1.56 17th: BC 0.40 Bottom: Millwall 0.12

Changing a hypothetical or offering a different one, when the reasonably conclusive first one wasn’t quite enough for someone digging their heels in. A team winning 20 in a row wouldn’t have to be at the top of the form table, but suspect most would still describe them as being in promotion form. I like how in your final sentence you’ve accused yourself so that you can accuse me of accusing you. Nifty.

Moving the goalposts? Haha. To be clear, I don’t believe anything you’ve contributed to this thread even vaguely supports the notion that a team that wins 20 games in a row isn’t in promotion form, whatever their league position. If you believe otherwise, fair enough.

Eh? It’s extrapolating the form of team I’m considering, that’s allowed, I’m not favouring them. Your reasoning is in effect, teams 1 and 2 who’ve each beaten the 10 bottom teams are the form teams for promotion and should be ‘favoured’ over the rest vs team 3 who’ve beaten teams 4 to 13. If that’s how you want to perceive form, fair enough, but to call me out for bs is dripping in irony.

Because, de facto, you can’t extrapolate for all, as @Davefevs points out above. Start of the season, 3 teams win their first 10 games. The team 3rd on goal difference will be automatically promoted if they retain their form, because the 1st and 2nd teams will have lost twice each to the team currently in 3rd. If 4 teams lose their first 10 games, the team just outside the relegation zone will be relegated if they continue their form, as they’ll have lost twice to each of the teams below them, so will be 0 points plays a minimum of 6. It’s a zero sum game.

The idea that 9 wins and a draw from 10 isn’t promotion form if two other teams win all ten is just pointless pedantry. That form over a season, is promotion form and everyone knows it. As they do with the equivalent for relegation.

Think what they’re getting at is we should have hung on to NP because he’s been promoted to the PL… either that or we should hire a 12 year old because Sir AF was once 12 and look what he accomplished.

U turns would imply people now think LM is definitively is the right person for the job, having previously been desperate for him to go. Not sure there are many signs of that change in view, but people can recognise performances for what they are, good and bad. If @W-S-M Seagull comes on demanding a 10 year contract for LM, fair enough. Overall I remain very unconvinced, but last two games have been solid/strong performances, so if that progress continues, all good. Never quite reached wanting him out, equally a long way from expecting great things next season - with a fair wind I’ll be wrong.

Sort of get your point at the edges, but think most have called bad performances and good performances what they were. Always exceptions as there were with NP and all before him, a few more interested in being right ahead of anything else.

And their high xG chances generally came from individual errors, rather than being tactically swept aside. I’m unimpressed overall by LM to date, but can see that he and the players got a lot right yesterday.

83/84 I think, Div 4 promotion battle.

Get where you’re coming from, but find the level of narcissism required to start a thread about not starting threads, simply intoxicating…

This. The nonsense spouted on here, by a few, about ‘cult of Nige’ is ridiculous (sometimes weak attempts at gaslighting). I haven’t seen a single poster imply he was perfect/didn’t make mistakes, just quite a few who can see he did a very decent job through some very difficult circumstances.

Except they wouldn’t. Unless there’s a halfwits half price offer.

Not sure unreasonable to call for a manager/coach to go if they’re losing every game. Ferguson was mentioned by someone as starting slowly at Man U, but he had won a European trophy beating Real Madrid, so wasn’t lacking a decent cv to give confidence that things might turn around.

Commute from leafy Harpenden!

For me Luton is the example that compares most interestingly with us. Top flight football, winning the league cup (and runners up), relegation, vast points reduction, non league, back up the leagues to the Prem and may well survive. If someone told me in advance that would be our journey, I’d take it, albeit when they exited the league system it was probably less fun. Despite the horror of relegation, suspect a lot of us found 75/76, 83/84, 89/90, 97/98, 06/07 and 14/15 amongst our most enjoyable seasons.

That’s fair, but not helped by his lack of professionalism when representing the club in interviews and childish antics on X etc.

Ultimately this season will have been a roaring success for BT (getting rid of NP) and, apparently, SL/JL (a decent cup run for the under 18’s) - for anyone actually interested in first team football, not so much.

Think NP around a bit longer, so the played/won league games this season are: NP 14/5 36% CF 1/1 100% LM 19/6 32%

For me it’s not really a Pearson vs Manning debate, it’s the structure of the club, which was always ropey and has got worse: From: Owner - SL (well intentioned/generous over many years, but limited on the football side inc appointing football people?) Chair - JL (not convinced) Board - too small, limited challenge and oversight? CEO - Gould (best for a long time?)/Alexander (Less visible but well regarded?) DoF - BT (has strengths, but no track record in such a critical role?) Manager - NP (imperfect, but has operated at headier heights than ours and appeared to have motivational skills needed) Coaches - CF/JY (promising but no significant track record?) To: Owner: unchanged Chair: unchanged Board: unchanged (?) CEO: role disappeared (broadly, maybe federated to a few people) DoF: unchanged Manager: role disappeared Coaches: LM/CH (no particularly strong track record, but signs of having great potential) Probably over simplified, but point is we’ve effectively lost two key layers of the structure, which had been filled with experienced people, but still have the remaining under qualified layers that lack strategy/oversight skills. Ie, in summary, the problem isn’t LM and nor was it NP. LM with a strong structure above would, in my view, be flying, as would NP (structure above and below). Apologies, long post to say what lots of us have said over a long time.

Zero irony.

Given we need a squad and won’t be awash with £10m players, I’ve no problem with a £300k signing. Is he likely to be the player that gets us over the line to the PL, no, but don’t think that equates to it’s awful he’s here.

Think he’s shown some good stuff at times, helping take pressure off other front players with a style that causes typical Championship centre backs different problems. And not sure either NP or LM have quite worked out how to use him (don’t think his Luton record was a fluke). But overall sure he and management would say it hasn’t quite worked out, albeit for £300k hardly our worst signing over the years.

46 appearances that are the equivalent of less than 18 full games.